Dr. Jacqueline Chu considered the man with a negative coronavirus test on the other end of the phone, and knew, her heart dropping, that the test result was not enough to clear him for work.
The man was a grocery store clerk — an essential worker — and the sole earner for his family. A 14-day isolation period would put him at risk of getting fired or not having enough money to make rent that month. But he had just developed classic COVID-19 symptoms, and many others around him in Chelsea, Massachusetts, had confirmed cases. Even with the negative test, his chances of having the disease were too high to dismiss.
For many Americans, including clinicians like Chu, who specializes in primary care and infectious disease at Massachusetts General Hospital, the pandemic has forced difficult conversations about the limits of medical tests. It has also revealed the catastrophic harms of failing to recognize those limits.
"People think a positive test equals disease and a negative test equals not disease," said Dr. Deborah Korenstein, who heads the general medicine division at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York City. "We've seen the damage of that in so many ways with COVID."
National COVID test shortages have emphasized testing's critical role in containing and mitigating the pandemic, but these inconvenient truths remain: A test result is rarely a definitive answer, but instead a single clue at one point in time, to be appraised alongside other clues like symptoms and exposure to those with confirmed cases. The result itself may be falsely positive or negative, or may show an abnormality that doesn't matter. And even an accurate, meaningful test result is useless (or worse) unless it's acted on appropriately.
These lessons are not unique to COVID-19.
Last year, David Albanese logged in to the online patient portal for his primary care doctor's office and discovered that his routine screening test for the hepatitis C virus showed a positive result.
"I never considered myself somebody who's in a high-risk category," said the 34-year-old Boston-area college administrator and adjunct history professor. "But I just know that for a couple of days, I was really, really anxious about this test. I didn't know if I should be behaving differently based on it."
Within days, a confirmatory test showed Albanese did not actually have the potentially severe yet curable liver infection. Still, the memory of that false positive result gave him a new perspective on testing writ large. He had been skeptical of recommendations shifting breast cancer screening to older ages to reduce the psychological toll of false positives, but he said they made more sense after his own testing drama.
"'Isn't it better to do the screening regardless?'" he said he used to think. "Now I realize it is a little more complicated."
These false positives are especially common for screening tests like hepatitis C antibody tests and mammograms that look for medical problems in healthy people without symptoms. They are designed to cast a wide net that catches more people with the disease, known as the test's sensitivity, but also risks catching some without it, which lowers what is known as the test's specificity.
Though some degree of uncertainty is inherent in all medical decisions, clinicians often fail to share this with patients because it's complicated to explain and unsettling and leaves doctors vulnerable to seeming uninformed, said Korenstein. What's more, doctors are trained to seek definitive answers and can themselves struggle to think in probabilities.
"High-tech diagnostic testing has led to this mirage of certainty," said Korenstein. "Back in the day before there were MRIs and what not, I think, doctors were more cognizant of how often they were uncertain."
Enter COVID. Coupled with genuine uncertainty about an emerging disease and a political environment that has sown misinformation and rendered science partisan, the nuances of testing are too often lost at a time when they are particularly crucial to convey.
Dr. Jasmine Marcelin, who specializes in infectious disease at the University of Nebraska Medical Center, was concerned to see Nebraskans tested at statewide facilities get "inconsistent results without a lot of guidance or explanation about what these results might mean." When she offers COVID testing, she said, she approaches it as she does any other medical decision, starting with a simple question: "What do you want to learn from this test?"
To answer this, it helps to know something about how coronavirus tests work and how well they do their jobs.
Many of the available tests are meant to tell you if you're infected right now. For example, polymerase chain reaction tests like the one Chu's patient received detect small traces of genetic material from the virus. But by some estimates, those tests have a false negative rate of up to 30%, meaning 3 out of 10 people who truly have the infection will test negative. This rate also varies based on who collects the sample, from which part of the body and when in the course of a possible infection.
Antigen tests look for viral proteins and are faster to analyze than the PCR, but also less accurate.
To know if you've already had COVID-19, the closest you can get is the COVID antibody test. But the too-common interpretation is black and white: I had COVID, or I didn't. Here, again, the reality is more nuanced. The test checks your blood for antibodies — your immune system's soldiers in the fight against the coronavirus. A negative antibody test could mean you were never infected with SARS-CoV-2, or it could mean that you're currently infected but haven't yet built up that army, or that these defenses have already faded away.
A positive test, on the other hand, may have mistakenly detected antibodies to another, similar-looking virus. And even if the test correctly shows you had COVID-19, it's not yet clear if this means you're protected from reinfection.
Yet, these shades of gray are difficult to internalize. Roy Avellaneda, the 49-year-old president of the Chelsea City Council, got the antibody test out of curiosity and could not help but see his positive result as what he called an immunity pass. "I can act a little bit cavalier with it now," he said. "Yes, I'll continue to wear a mask and so forth, but the fear is gone."
Korenstein said that's a common though worrisome reaction. "It's really hard to expect the public to have a more nuanced understanding when even doctors don't," she said.
Some of the uncertainty around COVID testing has abated as researchers learn more about the new disease. Early in the pandemic, healthcare providers retested patients with confirmed cases, looking for a negative PCR test to prove they were no longer infectious. But soon, epidemiologists discovered that a COVID patient rarely infected others 10 or more days after first developing symptoms (or 20, in severe cases), even if the PCR test was picking up traces of the — presumably dead — virus weeks or even months after initial infection. So the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and health systems adjusted their policies to clear patients on the basis of time rather than a negative test.
But while the desire for certainty in coronavirus testing is magnified by the rampant uncertainty in other facets of pandemic life, this is simply not something most medical tests can provide.
The Trump administration relied on an unusual maneuver that allowed executives to keep investments in drug companies that would benefit from the government's pandemic efforts.
April 16 was a big day for Moderna, a Massachusetts biotech company on the verge of becoming a front-runner in the U.S. government's race for a coronavirus vaccine. It had received roughly half a billion dollars in federal funding to develop a COVID shot that might be used on millions of Americans.
Thirteen days after the massive infusion of federal cash — which triggered a jump in the company's stock price — Moncef Slaoui, a Moderna board member and longtime drug industry executive, was awarded options to buy 18,270 shares in the company, according to Securities and Exchange Commission filings. The award added to 137,168 options he'd accumulated since 2018, the filings show.
It wouldn't be long before President Donald Trump announced Slaoui as the top scientific adviser for the government's $12 billion Operation Warp Speed program to rush COVID vaccines to market. In his Rose Garden speech on May 15, Trump lauded Slaoui as "one of the most respected men in the world" on vaccines.
The Trump administration relied on an unusual maneuver that allowed executives to keep investments in drug companies that would benefit from the government's pandemic efforts: They were brought on as contractors, doing an end run around federal conflict-of-interest regulations in place for employees. That has led to huge potential payouts — some already realized, according to a KHN analysis of SEC filings and other government documents.
Slaoui owned 137,168 Moderna stock options worth roughly $7 million on May 14, one day before Trump announced his senior role to help shepherd COVID vaccines. The day of his appointment, May 15, he resigned from Moderna's board. Three days later, on May 18, following the company's announcement of positive results from early-stage clinical trials, the options' value shot up to $9.1 million, the analysis found. The Department of Health and Human Services said Slaoui sold his holdings May 20, when they would have been worth about $8 million, and will donate certain profits to cancer research. Separately, Slaoui held nearly 500,000 shares in GlaxoSmithKline, where he worked for three decades, upon retiring in 2017, according to corporate filings.
Carlo de Notaristefani, an Operation Warp Speed adviser and former senior executive at Teva Pharmaceuticals, owned 665,799 shares of the drug company's stock as of March 10. While Teva is not a recipient of Warp Speed funding, Trump promoted its antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine as a COVID treatment, even with scant evidence that it worked. The company donated millions of tablets to U.S. hospitals and the drug received emergency use authorization from the Food and Drug Administration in March. In the following weeks, its share price nearly doubled.
Two other Operation Warp Speed advisers working on therapeutics, Drs. William Erhardt and Rachel Harrigan, own financial stakes of unknown value in Pfizer, which in July announced a $1.95 billion contract with HHS for 100 million doses of its vaccine. Erhardt and Harrigan were previously Pfizer employees.
"With those kinds of conflicts of interest, we don't know if these vaccines are being developed based on merit," said Craig Holman, a lobbyist for Public Citizen, a liberal consumer advocacy group.
An HHS spokesperson said the advisers are in compliance with the relevant federal ethical standards for contractors.
These investments in the pharmaceutical industry are emblematic of a broader trend in which a small group with the specialized expertise needed to inform an effective government response to the pandemic have financial stakes in companies that stand to benefit from the government response.
Slaoui maintained he was not in discussions with the federal government about a role when his latest batch of Moderna stock options was awarded, telling KHN he met with HHS Secretary Alex Azar and was offered the position for the first time May 6. The stock options awarded in late April were canceled as a result of his departure from the Moderna board in May, he said. According to the KHN analysis of his holdings, the options would have been worth more than $330,000 on May 14.
HHS declined to confirm that timeline.
The fate of Operation Warp Speed after President-elect Joe Biden takes office is an open question. While Democrats in Congress have pursued investigations into Warp Speed advisers and the contracting process under which they were hired, Biden hasn't publicly spoken about the program or its senior leaders. Spokespeople for the transition didn't respond to a request for comment.
The four HHS advisers were brought on through a National Institutes of Health contract with consulting firm Advanced Decision Vectors, so far worth$1.4 million, to provide expertise on the development and production of vaccines, therapies and other COVID products, according to the federal government's contracts database.
Slaoui's appointment in particular has rankled Democrats and organizations like Public Citizen. They say he has too much authority to be classified as a consultant. "It is inevitable that the position he is put in as co-chair of Operation Warp Speed makes him a government employee," Holman said.
The incoming administration may have a window to change the terms under which Slaoui was hired before his contract ends in March. Yet making big changes to Operation Warp Speed could disrupt one of the largest vaccination efforts in history while the American public anxiously awaits deliverance from the pandemic, which is breaking daily records for new infections. Warp Speed has set out to buy and distribute 300 million doses of a COVID vaccine, the first ones by year's end.
"By the end of December we expect to have about 40 million doses of these two vaccines available for distribution," Azar said Nov. 18, referring to front-runner vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna.
Azar maintained that Warp Speed would continue seamlessly even with a "change in leadership." "In the event of a transition, there's really just total continuity that would occur," the secretary said.
Pfizer, which didn't receive federal funds for research but secured the multibillion-dollar contract under Warp Speed, on Nov. 20 sought emergency authorization from the FDA; Moderna announced on Monday it would do so. In total, Moderna received nearly $1 billion in federal funds for development and a $1.5 billion contract with HHS for 100 million doses.
While it's impossible to peg the precise value of Slaoui's Moderna holdings without records of the sale transactions, KHN estimated their worth by evaluating the company's share prices on the dates he received the options and the stock's price on several key dates — including May 14, the day before his Warp Speed position was announced, and May 20.
However, the timing of Slaoui's divestment of his Moderna shares — five days after he resigned from the company's board — meant he did not have to file disclosures with the SEC confirming the sale, even though he was privy to insider information when he received the stock options, experts in securities law said. That weakness in securities law, according to good-governance experts, deprives the public of an independent source of information about the sale of Slaoui's stake in the company.
"You would think there would be kind of a one-year continuing obligation [to disclose the sale] or something like that," said Douglas Chia, president of Soundboard Governance and an expert on corporate governance issues. "But there's not."
HHS declined to provide documentation confirming that Slaoui sold his Moderna holdings. His investments in London-based GlaxoSmithKline — which is developing a vaccine with French drugmaker Sanofi and received $2.1 billion from the U.S. government — will be used for his retirement, Slaoui has said.
"I have always held myself to the highest ethical standards, and that has not changed upon my assumption of this role," Slaoui said in a statement released by HHS. "HHS career ethics officers have determined my contractor status, divestures and resignations have put me in compliance with the department's robust ethical standards."
Moderna, in an earlier statement to CNBC, said Slaoui divested "all of his equity interest in Moderna so that there is no conflict of interest" in his new role. However, the conflict-of-interest standards for Slaoui and other Warp Speed advisers are less stringent than those for federal employees, who are required to give up investments that would pose a conflict of interest. For instance, if Slaoui had been brought on as an employee, his stake from a long career at GlaxoSmithKline would be targeted for divestment.
Instead, Slaoui has committed to donating certain GlaxoSmithKline financial gains to the National Institutes of Health.
Offering Warp Speed advisers contracts might have been the most expedient course in a crisis.
"As the universe of potential qualified candidates to advise the federal government's efforts to produce a COVID-19 vaccine is very small, it is virtually impossible to find experienced and qualified individuals who have no financial interests in corporations that produce vaccines, therapeutics, and other lifesaving goods and services," Sarah Arbes, HHS' assistant secretary for legislation and a Trump appointee, wrote in September to Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.), who leads a House oversight panel on the coronavirus response.
That includes multiple drug industry veterans working as HHS advisers, an academic who's overseeing the safety of multiple COVID vaccines in clinical trials and sits on the board of Gilead Sciences, and even former government officials who divested stocks while they were federal employees but have since joined drug company boards.
Dr. Scott Gottlieb and Dr. Mark McClellan, former FDA commissioners, have been visible figures informally advising the federal response. Each sits on the board of a COVID vaccine developer.
After leaving the FDA in 2019, Gottlieb joined Pfizer's board and has bought 4,000 of its shares, at the time worth more than $141,000, according to SEC filings. As of April, he had additional stock units worth nearly $352,000 that will be cashed out should he leave the board, according to corporate filings. As a board member, Gottlieb is required to own a certain number of Pfizer shares.
McClellan has been on Johnson & Johnson's board since 2013 and earned $1.2 million in shares under a deferred-compensation arrangement, corporate filings show.
The two also receive thousands of dollars in cash fees annually as board members. Gottlieb and McClellan frequently disclose their corporate affiliations, but not always. Their Sept. 13 Wall Street Journal op-ed on how the FDA could grant emergency authorization of a vaccine identified their FDA roles and said they were on the boards of companies developing COVID vaccines but failed to name Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson. Both companies would benefit financially from such a move by the FDA.
"It isn't a lower standard for FDA approval," they wrote in the piece. "It's a more tailored, flexible standard that helps protect those who need it most while developing the evidence needed to make the public confident about getting a Covid-19 vaccine."
About the inconsistency, Gottlieb wrote in an email to KHN: "My affiliation to Pfizer is widely, prominently, and specifically disclosed in dozens of articles and television appearances, on my Twitter profile, and in many other places. I mention it routinely when I discuss Covid vaccines and I am proud of my affiliation to the company."
A spokesperson for the Duke-Margolis Center for Health Policy, which McClellan founded, noted that other Wall Street Journal op-eds cited his Johnson & Johnson role and that his affiliations are mentioned elsewhere. "Mark has consistently informed the WSJ about his board service with Johnson & Johnson, as well as other organizations," Patricia Shea Green said.
Johnson & Johnson's vaccine is in phase 3 clinical trials and could be available in early 2021.
Still, while they worked for the FDA, Gottlieb and McClellan were subject to federal restrictions on investments and protections against conflicts of interest that aren't in place for Warp Speed advisers.
According to the financial disclosure statements they signed with HHS, the advisers are required to donate certain stock profits to the NIH — but can do so after the stockholder dies. They can keep investments in drug companies, and the restrictions don't apply to stock options, which give executives the right to buy company shares in the future.
"This is a poorly drafted agreement," said Jacob Frenkel, an attorney at Dickinson Wright and former SEC lawyer, referring to the conflict-of-interest statement included in the NIH contract with Advanced Decision Vectors, the Warp Speed advisers' employing consulting firm. He said documents could have been "tighter and clearer in many respects," including prohibiting the advisers from exercising their options to buy shares while they are contractors.
De Notaristefani stepped down as Teva's executive vice president of global operations in October 2019, but according to corporate filings he would remain with the company until the end of June 2020 in order to "ensure an orderly transition." He's been working with Warp Speed since at least May overseeing manufacturing, according to an HHS spokesperson.
When Erhardt left Pfizer in May, U.S. COVID infections were climbing and the company was beginning vaccine clinical trials. Erhardt and Harrigan, whose LinkedIn profile says she left Pfizer in 2010, have worked as drug industry consultants.
"Ultimately, conflicts of interest in ethics turn on the mindset behavior of the responsible persons," said Frenkel, the former SEC attorney. "The public wants to know that it can rely on the effectiveness of the therapeutic or diagnostic product without wondering if a recommendation or decision was motivated for even the slightest reason other than product effectiveness and public interest."
Workplace safety regulators have taken a lenient stance toward employers during the pandemic, giving them broad discretion to decide internally whether to report worker deaths.
This article was published on Monday, November 30, 2020 in Kaiser Health News.
As Walter Veal cared for residents at the Ludeman Developmental Center in suburban Chicago, he saw the potential future of his grandson, who has autism.
So he took it on himself not just to bathe and feed the residents, which was part of the job, but also to cut their hair, run to the store to buy their favorite body wash and barbecue for them on holidays.
"They were his second family," said his wife, Carlene Veal.
Even after COVID-19 struck in mid-March and cases began spreading through the government-run facility, which serves nearly 350 adults with developmental disabilities, Walter was determined to go to work, Carlene said.
Staff members were struggling to acquire masks and other personal protective equipment at the time, many asking family members for donations and wearing rain ponchos sent by professional baseball teams.
All Walter had was a pair of gloves, Carlene said.
By mid-May, rumors of some sick residents and staffers had turned into 274 confirmed positive COVID tests, according to the Illinois Department of Human Services COVID tracking site. On May 16, Walter, 53, died of the virus. Three of his colleagues had already passed, according to interviews with Ludeman workers, the deceased employees' families and union officials.
State and federal laws say facilities like Ludeman are required to alert Occupational Safety and Health Administration officials about work-related employee deaths within eight hours. But facility officials did not deem the first staff death on April 13 work-related, so they did not report it. They made the same decision about the second and third deaths. And Walter's.
It's a pattern that's emerged across the nation, according to a KHN review of hundreds of worker deaths detailed by family members, colleagues and local, state and federal records.
Workplace safety regulators have taken a lenient stance toward employers during the pandemic, giving them broad discretion to decide internally whether to report worker deaths. As a result, scores of deaths were not reported to occupational safety officials from the earliest days of the pandemic through late October.
KHN and The Guardian are tracking health care workers who died from COVID-19 and writing about their lives and what happened in their final days.
KHN examined more than 240 deaths of health care workers profiled for theLost on the Frontline project and found that employers did not report more than one-third of them to a state or federal OSHA office, many based on internal decisions that the deaths were not work-related — conclusions that were not independently reviewed.
Work-safety advocates say OSHA investigations into staff deaths can help officials pinpoint problems before they endanger other employees as well as patients or residents. Yet, throughout the pandemic, health care staff deaths have steadily climbed. Thorough reviews could have also prompted the Department of Labor, which oversees OSHA, to urge the White House to address chronic protective gear shortages or sharpen guidance to help keep workers safe.
Since no public agency releases the names of health care workers who die of COVID-19, a team of reporters building the Lost on the Frontline database has scoured local news stories, GoFundMe campaigns, and obituary and social media sites to identify nearly 1,400 possible cases. More than 260 fatalities have been vetted with families, employers and public records.
For this investigation, journalists examined worker deaths at more than 100 health care facilities where OSHA records showed no fatality investigation was underway.
At Ludeman, the circumstances surrounding the April 13 worker death might have shed light on the hazards facing Veal. But no state work safety officials showed up to inspect — because the Department of Human Services, which operates Ludeman and employs the staff, said it did not report any of the four deaths there to Illinois OSHA.
The department said "it could not determine the employees contracted COVID-19 at the workplace" — despite its being the site of one of the largest U.S. outbreaks. Since Veal's death in May, dozens more workers have tested positive for COVID-19, according to DHS' COVID tracking site.
OSHA inspectors monitor local news media and sometimes will open investigations even without an employer's fatality report. Through Nov. 5, federal OSHA offices issued 63 citations to facilities for failing to report a death. And when inspectors do show up, they often force improvements — requiring more protective equipment for workers and better training on how to use it, files reviewed by KHN show.
Still, many deaths receive little or no scrutiny from work-safety authorities. In California, public health officials have documented about 200 health care worker deaths. Yet the state's OSHA office received only 75 fatality reports at health care facilities through Oct. 26, Cal/OSHA records show.
Nursing homes, which are under strict Medicare requirements, reported more than 1,000 staff deaths through mid-October, but only about 350 deaths of long-term care facility workers appear to have been reported to OSHA, agency records show.
Workers whose deaths went unreported include some who took painstaking precautions to avoid getting sick and passing the virus to family members: One California lab technician stayed in a hotel during the workweek. An Arizona nursing home worker wore a mask for family movie nights. A Nevada nurse told his brother he didn't have adequate PPE. Nevada OSHA confirmed to KHN that his death was not reported to the agency and that officials would investigate.
KHN asked health care employers why they chose not to report fatalities. Some cited the lack of proof that a worker was exposed on-site, even in workplaces that reported a COVID outbreak. Others cited privacy concerns and gave no explanation. Still others ignored requests for comment or simply said they had followed government policies.
"It is so disrespectful of the agencies and the employers to shunt these cases aside and not do everything possible to investigate the exposures," said Peg Seminario, a retired union health and safety director who co-authored a study on OSHA oversight with scholars from Harvard's T.H. Chan School of Public Health.
A Department of Labor spokesperson said in a statement that an employer must report a fatality within eight hours of knowing the employee died and after determining the cause of death was a work-related case of COVID-19.
The department said employers also are bound to report a COVID death if it comes within 30 days of a workplace incident — meaning exposure to COVID-19.
Yet pinpointing exposure to an invisible virus can be difficult, with high rates of pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic transmission and spread of the virus just as prevalent inside a hospital COVID unit as out.
Those challenges, plus May guidance from OSHA, gave employers latitude to decide behind closed doors whether to report a case. So it's no surprise that cases are going unreported, said Eric Frumin, who has testified to Congress on worker safety and is health and safety director for Change to Win, a partnership of seven unions.
"Why would an employer report unless they feel for some reason they're socially responsible?" Frumin said. "Nobody's holding them to account."
Downside of Discretion
OSHA's guidance to employers offered pointers on how to decide whether a COVID death is work-related. It would be if a cluster of infections arose at one site where employees work closely together "and there is no alternative explanation." If a worker had close contact with someone outside of work infected with the virus, it might not have been work-related, the guidance says.
Ultimately, the memo says, if an employer can't determine that a worker "more likely than not" got sick on the job, "the employer does not need to record that."
In mid-March, the union that represented Paul Odighizuwa, a food service worker at Oregon Health & Science University, raised concerns with university management about the virus possibly spreading through the Food and Nutrition Services Department.
Workers there — those taking meal orders, preparing food, picking up trays for patient rooms and washing dishes — were unable to keep their distance from one another, said Michael Stewart, vice president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 328, which represents about 7,000 workers at OHSU. Stewart said the union warned administrators they were endangering people's lives.
Soon the virus tore through the department, Stewart said. At least 11 workers in food service got the virus, the union said. Odighizuwa, 61, a pillar of the local Nigerian community, died on May 12.
OHSU did not report the death to the state's OSHA and defended the decision, saying it "was determined not to be work-related," according to a statement from Tamara Hargens-Bradley, OHSU's interim senior director of strategic communications.
She said the determination was made "[b]ased on the information gathered by OHSU's Occupational Health team," but she declined to provide details, citing privacy issues.
Stewart blasted OHSU's response. When there's an outbreak in a department, he said, it should be presumed that's where a worker caught the virus.
"We have to do better going forward," Stewart said. "We have to learn from this." Without an investigation from an outside regulator like OSHA, he doubts that will happen.
Stacy Daugherty heard that Oasis Pavilion Nursing and Rehabilitation Center in Casa Grande, Arizona, was taking strict precautions as COVID-19 surged in the facility and in Pinal County, almost halfway between Phoenix and Tucson.
Her father, a certified nursing assistant there, was also extra cautious: He believed that if he got the virus, "he wouldn't make it," Daugherty said.
Mark Daugherty, a father of five, confided in his youngest son when he fell ill in May that he believed he contracted the coronavirus at work, his daughter said in a message to KHN.
Early in June, the facility filed its first public report on COVID cases to Medicare authorities: Twenty-three residents and eight staff members had fallen ill. It was one of the largest outbreaks in the state. (Medicare requires nursing homes to report staff deaths each week in a process unrelated to OSHA.)
By then, Daugherty, 60, was fighting for his life, his absence felt by the residents who enjoyed his banjo, accordion and piano performances. But the country's occupational safety watchdog wasn't called in to figure out whether Daugherty, who died June 19, was exposed to the virus at work. His employer did not report his death to OSHA.
"We don't know where Mark might have contracted COVID 19 from, since the virus was widespread throughout the community at that time. Therefore there was no need to report to OSHA or any other regulatory agencies," Oasis Pavilion's administrator, Kenneth Opara, wrote in an email to KHN.
Since then, 15 additional staffers have tested positive and the facility suspects a dozen more have had the virus, according to Medicare records.
Gaps in the Law
If Oasis Pavilion needed another reason not to report Daugherty's death, it might have had one. OSHA requiresnotice of a death only within 30 days of a work-related incident. Daugherty, like many others, clung to life for weeks before he died.
That is one loophole — among others — in work-safety laws that experts say could use a second look in the time of COVID-19.
In addition, federal OSHA rules don't apply to about 8 million public employees. Only government workers in states with their own state OSHA agency are covered. In other words, in about half the country if a government employee dies on the job — such as a nurse at a public hospital in Florida, or a paramedic at a fire department in Texas — there's no requirement to report it and no one to look into it.
So there was little chance anyone from OSHA would investigate the deaths of two health workers early this year at Central State Hospital in Georgia — a state-run psychiatric facility in a state without its own worker-safety agency.
On March 24, a manager at the facility had warned staff they "must not wear articles of clothing, including Personal Protective Equipment" that violate the dress code, according to an email KHN obtained through a public records request.
Three days later, what had started as a low-grade illness for Mark DeLong, a licensed practical nurse at the facility, got serious. His cough was so severe late on March 27 that he called 911 — and handed the phone to his wife, Jan, because he could barely speak, she said.
She went to visit him in the hospital the next day, fully expecting a pleasant visit with her karaoke partner. "By the time I got there it was too late," she said. DeLong, 53 "had passed."
She learned after his death that he'd had COVID-19.
Back at the hospital, workers had been frustrated with the early directive that employees should not wear their own PPE.
Bruce Davis had asked his supervisors if he could wear his own mask but was told no because it wasn't part of the approved uniform, according to his wife, Gwendolyn Davis. "He told me 'They don't care,'" she said.
Two days after DeLong's death, the directive was walked back and employees and contractors were informed they could "continue and are authorized to wear Personal Protective Gear," according to a March 30 email from administrators. But Davis, a Pentecostal pastor and nursing assistant supervisor, was already sick. Davis worked at the hospital for 27 years and saw little distinction between the love he preached at the altar and his service to the patients he bathed, fed and cared for, his wife said.
Sick with the virus, Davis died April 11.
At the time, 24 of Central State's staffers had tested positive, according to the Georgia Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Disabilities, which runs the facility. To date, nearly 100 staffers and 33 patients at Central State have gotten the virus, according to figuresfrom the state agency.
"I don't think they knew what was going on either," Jan DeLong said. "Somebody needs to check into it."
In response to questions from KHN, a spokesperson for the department provided a prepared statement: "There was never a ban on commercially available personal protective equipment, even if the situation did not call for its use according to guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Georgia Department of Public Health at the time."
KHN reviewed more than a dozen other health worker deaths at state or local government workplaces in states like Texas, Florida and Missouri that went unreported to OSHA for the same reason — the facilities were run by government agencies in a state without its own worker safety agency.
Inside Ludeman
In mid-March, staff members at the Ludeman Developmental Center were desperate for PPE. The facility was running low on everything from gloves and gowns to hand sanitizer, according to interviews with current and former workers, families of deceased workers, and union officials.
Due to a national shortage at the time, surgical masks went only to staffers working with known positive cases, said Anne Irving, regional director for AFSCME Council 31, the union that represents Ludeman employees.
Residents in the Village of Park Forest, Illinois, where the facility is located, tried to help by sewing masks or pivoting their businesses to produce face shields and hand sanitizer, said Mayor Jonathan Vanderbilt. But providing enough supplies for more than 900 Ludeman employees proved difficult.
Michelle Abernathy, 52, a newly appointed unit director, bought her own gloves at Costco. In late March, a resident on Abernathy's unit showed symptoms, said Torrence Jones, her fiancé who also works at the facility. Then Abernathy developed a fever.
When she died on April 13 — the first known Ludeman staff member lost to the pandemic — the Illinois Department of Human Services, which runs Ludeman, made no report to safety regulators. After seeing media reports, Illinois OSHA sent the agency questions about Abernathy's daily duties and working conditions. Based on DHS' responses and subsequent phone calls, state OSHA officials determined Abernathy's death was "not work-related."
Barbara Abernathy, Michelle's mom, doesn't buy it. "Michelle was basically a hermit," she said, going only from work to home. She couldn't have gotten the virus anywhere else, she said. In response to OSHA's inquiry for evidence that the exposure was not related to her workplace, her employer wrote "N/A," according to documents reviewed by KHN.
Two weeks after Abernathy's passing, two more employees died: Cephus Lee, 59, and Jose Veloz III, 52. Both worked in support services, boxing food and delivering it to the 40 buildings on campus. Their deaths were not reported to Illinois OSHA.
Veloz was meticulous at home, having groceries delivered and wiping down each item before bringing it inside, said his son, Joseph Ricketts.
But work was another story. Maintaining social distance in the food prep area was difficult, and there was little information on who had been infected or exposed to the virus, according to his son.
"No matter what my dad did, he was screwed," Ricketts said. Adding, he thought Ludeman did not do what it should have done to protect his dad on the job.
A March 27 complaint to Illinois OSHA said it took a week for staff to be notified about multiple employees who tested positive, according to documents obtained by the Documenting COVID-19 project at the Brown Institute for Media Innovation and shared with KHN. An early April complaint was more frank: "Lives are endangered," it said.
That's how Rose Banks felt when managers insisted she go to work, even though she was sick and awaiting a test result, she said. Her husband, also a Ludeman employee, had already tested positive a week earlier.
Banks said she was angry about coming in sick, worried she might infect co-workers and residents. After spending a full day at the facility, she said, she came home to a phone call saying her test was positive. She's currently on medical leave.
With some Ludeman staff assigned to different homes each shift, the virus quickly traveled across campus. By mid-May, 76 staff and 198 residents had tested positive, according to DHS' COVID tracking site.
Carlene Veal said her husband, Walter, was tested at the facility in late April. But by the time he got the results weeks later, she said, he was already dying.
Carlene can still picture the last time she saw Walter, her high school sweetheart and a man she called her "superhero" for 35 years of marriage and raising four kids together. He was lying on a gurney in their driveway with an oxygen mask on his face, she said. He pulled the mask down to say "I love you" one last time before the ambulance pulled away.
The Illinois Department of Human Services said that, since the beginning of the pandemic, it has implemented many new protocols to mitigate the outbreak at Ludeman, working as quickly as possible based on what was known about the virus at the time. It has created an emergency staffing plan, identified negative-airflow spaces to isolate sick individuals and made "extensive efforts" to procure more PPE, and it is testing all staffers and residents regularly.
"We were deeply saddened to lose four colleagues who worked at Ludeman Developmental Center and succumbed to the virus," the agency said in a statement. "We are committed to complying with and following all health and safety guidelines for COVID-19."
The number of new cases at Ludeman has remained low for several months now, according to DHS' COVID tracking site.
But that does little to console the families of those who have died.
When a Ludeman supervisor called Barbara Abernathy in June to express condolences and ask if there was anything they could do, Abernathy didn't know how to respond.
"There was nothing they could do for me now," she said. "They hadn't done what they needed to do before."
Shoshana Dubnow, Anna Sirianni, Melissa Bailey and Hannah Foote contributed to this report.
A survey by the Physicians Foundation estimated that 8% of all physician practices nationally — around 16,000 — have closed under the stress of the pandemic.
This article was published on Monday, November 30, 2020 in Kaiser Health News.
Cormay Caine misses a full day of work and drives more than 130 miles round trip to take five of her children to their pediatrician. The Sartell, Minnesota, clinic where their doctor used to work closed in August.
Caine is one of several parents who followed Dr. Heather Decker to her new location on the outskirts of Minneapolis, an hour and a half away. Many couldn't get appointments for months with swamped nearby doctors.
"I was kind of devastated that she was leaving because I don't like switching providers, and my kids were used to her. She's just an awesome doctor," said Caine, a postal worker who recently piled the kids into her car for back-to-back appointments. "I just wish she didn't have to go that far away."
So does Decker, who had hoped to settle in the Sartell area. She recently bought her four-bedroom "dream home" there.
The HealthPartners Central Minnesota Clinic where Decker worked is part of a wave of COVID-related closures starting to wash across America, reducing access to care in areas already short on primary care doctors.
Although no one tracks medical closures, recent research suggests they number in the thousands. Asurvey by the Physicians Foundation estimated that 8% of all physician practices nationally — around 16,000 — have closed under the stress of the pandemic. That survey didn't break them down by type, but another from the Virginia-based Larry A. Green Center and the Primary Care Collaborative found in late September that 7% of primary care practices were unsure they could stay open past December without financial assistance.
And many more teeter on the economic brink, experts say.
"The last few years have been difficult for primary care practices, especially independent ones," said Dr. Karen Joynt Maddox, co-director of the Center for Health Economics and Policy at Washington University in St. Louis. "Putting on top of that COVID, that's in many cases the proverbial straw. These practices are not operating with huge margins. They're just getting by."
When offices close, experts said, the biggest losers are patients, who may skip preventive care or regular appointments that help keep chronic diseases such as diabetes under control.
"This is especially poignant in the rural areas. There aren't any good choices. What happens is people end up getting care in the emergency room," said Dr. Michael LeFevre, head of the family and community medicine department at the University of Missouri and a practicing physician in Columbia. "If anything, what this pandemic has done is put a big spotlight on what was already a big crack in our health care system."
Federal data shows that 82 million Americans live in primary care "health professional shortage areas," and the nation needed more than 15,000 more primary care practitioners even before the pandemic began.
Once the coronavirus struck, some practices buckled when patients stayed away in droves for fear of catching it, said Dr. Gary Price, president of the Physicians Foundation, a nonprofit grant-making and research organization. Its survey, based on 3,513 responses from emails to half a million doctors, found that 4 in 10 practices saw patient volumes drop by more than a quarter.
On the West Coast, a survey released in October by the California Medical Association found that one-quarter of practices in that state saw revenues drop by at least half. One respondent wrote: "We are closing next month."
Decker's experience at HealthPartners is typical. Before the pandemic, she saw about 18 patients a day. That quickly dropped to six or eight, "if that," she said. "There were no well checks, which is the bread-and-butter of pediatrics."
In an emailed statement, officials at HealthPartners, which has more than 50 primary care clinics around the Twin Cities and western Wisconsin, said closing the one in Sartell "was not an easy decision," but the pandemic caused an immediate, significant drop in revenue. While continuing to provide dental care in Sartell, northwest of Minneapolis, the company encouraged employees to apply for open positions elsewhere in the organization. Decker got one of them. Officials also posted online information for patients on where more than 20 clinicians were moving.
The pandemic's financial ripples rocked practices of all sizes, said LeFevre, the Missouri doctor. Before the pandemic, he said, the 10 clinics in his group saw a total of 3,500 patients a week. COVID-19 temporarily cut that number in half.
"We had fiscal reserves to weather the storm. Small practices don't often have that. But it's not like we went unscathed," he said. "All staff had a one-week furlough without pay. All providers took a 10% pay cut for three months."
As revenues dropped in medical practices, overhead costs stayed the same. And practices faced new costs such as personal protective equipment, which grew more expensive as demand exceeded supply, especially for small practices without the bulk buying power of large ones.
Doctors also lost money in other ways, said Rebecca Etz, co-director of the Green Center research group. For example, she said, pediatricians paid for vaccines upfront, "then when no one came in, they expired."
Some doctors took out loans or applied for Provider Relief Fund money under the federal CARES Act. Dr. Joseph Provenzano, who practices in Modesto, California, said his group of more than 300 physicians received $8.7 million in relief in the early days of the pandemic.
"We were about ready to go under," he said. "That came in the nick of time."
While the group's patient loads have largely bounced back, it still had to permanently close three of 11 clinics.
"We've got to keep practice doors open so that we don't lose access, especially now that people need it most," said Dr. Ada Stewart, president of the American Academy of Family Physicians.
Caine, the Minnesota mom, said her own health care has suffered because she also saw providers at the now-closed Sartell clinic. While searching for new ones, she's had to seek treatment in urgent care offices and the emergency room.
"I'm fortunate because I'm able to make it. I'm able to improvise. But what about the families that don't have transportation?" she said. "Older people and the more sickly people really need these services, and they've been stripped away."
When Robert Woodrum fell off his bike in July, he got stitches at Carson Tahoe Regional Medical Center. The family's insurer initially denied the claim.
This article was published on Wednesday, November 25, 2020 in Kaiser Health News.
Because they were on bikes, he called the fire department in Carson City, Nevada.
“They were great,” said Woodrum. “They took him on a stretcher to the ER.”
Robert received stitches and anesthesia at Carson Tahoe Regional Medical Center. He’s since recovered nicely.
Then the denial letter came.
The Patient: Robert Woodrum, covered under his mother’s health insurance plan from the Nevada Public Employees’ Benefits Program
Total Bill: $18,933.44, billed by the hospital
Service Provider: Carson Tahoe Regional Medical Center, part of not-for-profit Carson Tahoe Health
Medical Service: Stitches and anesthesia during an emergency department visit
What Gives: The Aug. 4 explanation of benefits (EOB) document said the Woodrum’s claim had been rejected and their patient responsibility would be the entire sum of $18,933.44.
This case involves an all-too-frequent dance between different types of insurers about which one should pay a patient’s bill if an accident is involved. All sides do their best to avoid paying. And, no surprise to Bill of the Month followers: When insurers can’t agree, who gets a scary bill? The patient.
The legal name for the process of determining which type of insurance is primarily responsible is subrogation.
Could another policy — say, auto or home coverage or workers’ compensation — be obligated to pay if someone was at fault for the accident?
Subrogation is an area of law that allows an insurer to recoup expenses should a third party be found responsible for the injury or damage in question.
Health insurers say subrogation helps hold down premiums by reimbursing them for their medical costs.
About two weeks after the accident, Robert’s parents — both lawyers — got the EOB informing them of the insurer’s decision.
The note also directed questions to Luper Neidenthal & Logan, a law firm in Columbus, Ohio, that specializes in helping insurers recover medical costs from “third parties,” meaning people found at fault for causing injuries.
The firm’s website boasts that “we collect over 98% of recoverable dollars for the State of Nevada.”
Another letter also dated Aug. 4 soon arrived from HealthScope Benefits, a large administrative firm that processes claims for health plans.
The claim, it said, included billing codes for care “commonly used to treat injuries” related to vehicle crashes, slip-and-fall accidents or workplace hazards. Underlined for emphasis, one sentence warned that the denied claim would not be reconsidered until an enclosed accident questionnaire was filled out.
Adam Woodrum, who happens to be a personal injury attorney, runs into subrogation all the time representing his clients, many of whom have been in car accidents. But it still came as a shock, he said, to have his health insurer deny payment because there was no third party responsible for their son’s ordinary bike accident. And the denial came before the insurer got information about whether someone else was at fault.
“It’s like deny now and pay later,” he said. “You have insurance and pay for years, then they say, ‘This is denied across the board. Here’s your $18,000 bill.’”
When contacted, the Public Employees’ Benefits Program in Nevada would not comment specifically on Woodrum’s situation, but a spokesperson sent information from its health plan documents. She referred questions to HealthScope Benefits about whether the program’s policy is to deny claims first, then seek more information. The Little Rock, Arkansas-based firm did not return emails asking for comment.
The Nevada health plan’s documents say state legislation allows the program to recover “any and all payments made by the Plan” for the injury “from the other person or from any judgment, verdict or settlement obtained by the participant in relation to the injury.”
Attorney Matthew Anderson at the law firm that handles subrogation for the Nevada health plan said he could not speak on behalf of the state of Nevada, nor could he comment directly on Woodrum’s situation. However, he said his insurance industry clients use subrogation to recoup payments from other insurers “as a cost-saving measure,” because “they don’t want to pass on high premiums to members.”
Despite consumers’ unfamiliarity with the term, subrogation is common in the health insurance industry, said Leslie Wiernik, CEO of the National Association of Subrogation Professionals, the industry’s trade association.
“Let’s say a young person falls off a bike,” she said, “but the insurer was thinking, ‘Did someone run him off the road, or did he hit a pothole the city didn’t fill?’”
Statistics on how much money health insurers recover through passing the buck to other insurers are hard to find. A 2013 Deloitte consulting firm study, commissioned by the Department of Labor, estimated that subrogation helped private health plans recover between $1.7 billion and $2.5 billion in 2010 — a tiny slice of the $849 billion they spent that year.
Medical providers may have reason to hope that bills will be sent through auto or homeowner’s coverage, rather than health insurance, as they’re likely to get paid more.
That’s because auto insurers “are going to pay billed charges, which are highly inflated,” said attorney Ryan Woody, who specializes in subrogation. Health insurers, by contrast, have networks of doctors and hospitals with whom they negotiate lower payment rates.
Resolution: Because of his experience as an attorney, Woodrum felt confident it would eventually all work out. But the average patient wouldn’t understand the legal quagmire and might not know how to fight back.
“I hear the horror stories every day from people who don’t know what it is, are confused by it and don’t take appropriate action,” Woodrum said. “Then they’re a year out with no payment on their bills.” Or, fearing for their credit, they pay the bills.
After receiving the accident questionnaire, Woodrum filled it out and sent it back. There was no liable third party, he said. No driver was at fault.
His child just fell off his bicycle.
HealthScope Benefits reconsidered the claim. It was paid in September, two months after the accident. The hospital received less than half of what it originally billed, based on rates negotiated through his health plan.
The insurer paid $7,414.76 of the cost, and the Woodrums owed $1,853.45, which represented their share of the deductibles and copays.
The Takeaway: The mantra of Bill of the Month is don’t just write the check. But also don’t ignore scary bills from insurers or hospitals.
It’s not uncommon for insured patients to be questioned on whether their injury or medical condition might have been related to an accident. On some claim forms, there is even a box for the patient to check if it was an accident.
But in the Woodrums’ case, as in others, it was an automatic process. The insurer denied the claim based solely on the medical code indicating a possible accident.
If an insurer denies all payment for all medical care related to an injury, suspect that some type of subrogation is at work.
Don’t panic.
If you get an accident questionnaire, “fill it out, be honest about what happened,” said Sean Domnick, secretary of the American Association for Justice, an organization of plaintiffs lawyers. Inform your insurer and all other parties of the actual circumstances of the injury.
And do so promptly.
That’s because the clock starts ticking the day the medical care is provided and policyholders may face a statutory or contractual requirement that medical bills be submitted within a specific time frame, which can vary.
“Do not ignore it,” said Domnick. “Time and delay can be your enemy.”
Bill of the Month is a crowdsourced investigation by KHN and NPR that dissects and explains medical bills. Do you have an interesting medical bill you want to share with us? Tell us about it!
Across the nation, workplaces have been the source of major coronavirus outbreaks largely among the so-called essential workers who bear the brunt of COVID infections and deaths.
This article was published on Wednesday, November 25, 2020 in Kaiser Health News.
Brandon Hudgins works the main floor at Fleet Feet, a running-shoe store chain, for more than 30 hours a week. He chats with customers, measuring their feet and dashing in and out of the storage area to locate right-sized shoes. Sometimes, clients drag their masks down while speaking. Others refuse to wear masks at all.
So he worries about COVID-19. And with good reason. Across the U.S., COVID hospitalizations and deaths are hitting record-shattering new heights. The nation saw 198,633 new cases on Friday alone.
Unlike in the early days of the pandemic, though, many stores nationwide aren't closing. And regular COVID-19 testing of those working remains patchy at best.
"I've asked, what if someone on staff gets symptoms? 'You have to stay home,'" said Hudgins, 33, who works in High Point, North Carolina. But as an hourly employee, staying home means not getting paid. "It's stressful, especially without regular testing. Our store isn't very big, and you're in there all day long."
To the store's credit, Hudgins said the manager has instituted a locked-door policy, where employees determine which customers can enter. They sanitize the seating area between customers and administer regular employee temperature checks. Still, there's no talk of testing employees for COVID-19. Fleet Feet did not respond to multiple requests to talk about its testing policies.
The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued guidance to employers to include COVID testing, and it advised that people working in close quarters be tested periodically. However, the federal government does not require employers to offer those tests.
But the board overseeing the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health, known as Cal/OSHA, on Thursday approved emergency safety rules that are soon likely to require the state's employers to provide COVID testing to all workers exposed to an outbreak on the job at no cost to the employees. Testing must be repeated a week later, followed by periodic testing.
California would be the first state to mandate this, though the regulation doesn't apply to routine testing of employees. That is up to individual businesses.
The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration inspects workplaces based on workers' complaints — over 40,000 of which related to COVID-19 have been filed with the agency at the state and federal levels.
Workers "have every right to be concerned," said Dr. Peter Chin-Hong, an epidemiologist at the University of California-San Francisco. "They are operating in a fog. There is little economic incentive for corporations to figure out who has COVID at what sites."
Waiting for symptoms to emerge before testing is ill-considered, Chin-Hong noted. People can exhibit no symptoms while spreading the virus. A CDC reportfound that, among people with active infections, 44% reported no symptoms.
Yet testing alone cannot protect employees. While workplaces can vary dramatically, Chin-Hong emphasized the importance of enforcing safety guidelines like social distancing and wearing face masks, as well as being transparent with workers when someone gets sick.
Molly White, who works for the Missouri state government, was required to return to the office once a week starting in July. But White, who is on drugs to suppress her immune system, feared her employer's "cavalier attitude toward COVID and casual risk taking." Masks are encouraged for employees but are not mandatory, and there's no testing policy or even guidance on where to get tested, she said. White filed for and received an Americans With Disabilities Act exception, which lasts through the end of the year, to avoid coming into the office.
After a cluster of 39 COVID cases emerged in September in the building where she normally works, White was relieved to at least get an email notifying her of the outbreak. A few days later, Gov. Mike Parson visited the building, and he tested positive for COVID-19 soon after.
Following pressure from labor groups, Amazon reported in a blog post last month that almost 20,000 employees had tested positive or been presumed positive for COVID-19 since the pandemic began. To help curb future outbreaks, the online retailing giant, which also owns Whole Foods, built its own testing facilities, hired lab technicians and said it planned to conduct 50,000 daily tests across 650 sites by this month.
The National Football League tests players and other essential workers daily. An NFL spokesperson said the league conducts 40,000 to 45,000 tests a week through New Jersey-based BioReference Laboratories, though both organizations declined to share a price tag. Reports over the summer estimated the season's testing program would cost about $75 million.
Not all companies, particularly those not in the limelight, have the interest — or the money — to regularly test workers.
"It depends on the company how much they care," said Gary Glader, president of Horton Safety Consultants in Orland Park, Illinois. Horton works with dozens of companies in the manufacturing, construction and transportation industries to write exposure control plans to limit the risk of COVID-19 outbreaks and avoid OSHA citations. "Some companies could care less about their people, never have."
IGeneX, a diagnostic testing company in Milpitas, California, gets around 15 calls each day from companies across the country inquiring about its employer testing program. The lab works with about 100 employers — from 10-person outfits to two pro sports teams — mainly in the Bay Area. IGeneX tests its own workers every other week.
One client is Tarana Wireless, a nearby telecommunications company that needs about 30 employees in the office at a time to operate equipment. In addition to monthly COVID tests, the building also gets cleaned every two hours, and masks are mandatory.
"It's definitely a burden," said Amy Beck, the company's director of human resources. "We are venture-backed and have taken pay cuts to make our money extend longer. But we do this to make everyone feel safe. We don't have unlimited resources."
IGeneX offers three prices, depending on how fast a company wants the results: $135 for a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test with a 36- to 48-hour turnaround — down to around $100 a test for some higher-volume clients; one-day testing costs $250, and it's $400 for a six-hour turnaround.
In some cases, IGeneX is able to bill the companies' health insurance plan.
"Absolutely, it's expensive," said IGeneX spokesperson Joe Sullivan. "I don't blame anyone for wanting to pay as little as possible. It's not 'one and done,' which companies are factoring in."
For those going into work, Chin-Hong recommends that companies test their employees once a week with PCR tests, or twice a week with the less sensitive antigen tests.
Ideally, Chin-Hong said, public health departments would work directly with employers to administer COVID testing and quash potential outbreaks. But, as KHN has reported extensively, these local agencies are chronically underfunded and overworked. Free community testing sites can sometimes take days to weeks to return results, bogged down by extreme demand at commercial labs like Quest Diagnostics and LabCorp and supply chain problems.
Hudgins, who receives his health insurance through North Carolina's state exchange, tries to get a monthly COVID test at CVS on his own time. But occasionally, his insurance — which requires certain criteria to qualify — has declined to pay for it, he said.
"Being in the service industry in a state where numbers are ridiculously high," he said in an email, "I see volumes of people every day, and I think getting tested is the smart and considerate thing to do."
For all its complexity and nearly endless options, Medicare fundamentally boils down to two choices: traditional fee-for-service or the managed care approach of Medicare Advantage.
This article was published on Tuesday, November 24, 2020 in Kaiser Health News.
If you’ve been watching TV lately, you may have seen actor Danny Glover or Joe Namath, the 77-year-old NFL legend, urging you to call an 800 number to get fabulous extra benefits from Medicare.
There are plenty of other Medicare ads, too, many set against a red-white-and-blue background meant to suggest officialdom — though if you stand about a foot from the television screen, you might see the fine print saying they are not endorsed by any government agency.
Rather, they are health insurance agents aggressively vying for a piece of a lucrative market.
This is what Medicare’s annual enrollment period has come to. Beneficiaries — people who are 65 or older, or with long-term disabilities — have until Dec. 7 to join, switch or drop health or drug plans, which take effect Jan. 1. By switching plans, they can potentially save money or get benefits not ordinarily provided by the federal insurance program.
For all its complexity and nearly endless options, Medicare fundamentally boils down to two choices: traditional fee-for-service or the managed care approach of Medicare Advantage.
The right choice for you depends on your financial wherewithal and current health status, and on future health scenarios that are often difficult to foresee and unpleasant to contemplate.
Costs and benefits among the multitude of competing Medicare plans vary widely, and the maze of rules and other details can be overwhelming. Indeed, information overload is part of the reason a majority of the more than 60 million people on Medicare, including over 6 million in California, do not comparison-shop or switch to more suitable plans.
“I’ve been doing it for 33 years and my head still spins,” says Jill Selby, corporate vice president of strategic initiatives and product development at SCAN, a Long Beach nonprofit that is one of California’s largest purveyors of Medicare managed care, known as Medicare Advantage. “It’s definitely a college course.”
Which explains why airwaves and mailboxes are jammed with all that promotional material from people offering to help you pass the course.
Many are touting Medicare Advantage, which is administered by private health insurers. It might save you money, but not necessarily, and research suggests that, in some cases, it costs the government more than administering traditional Medicare.
But the hard marketing is not necessarily a sign of bad faith. Licensed insurance agents want the nice commission they get when they sign somebody up, but they can also provide valuable information on the bewildering nuances of Medicare.
Industry insiders and outside experts agree most people should not navigate Medicare alone. “It’s just too complicated for the average individual,” says Mark Diel, chief executive officer of California Coverage and Health Initiatives, a statewide association of local outreach and health care enrollment organizations.
However, if you decide to consult with an insurance agent, keep your antenna up. Ask people you trust to recommend agents, or try eHealth or another established online brokerage. Vet any agent you choose by asking questions on the phone.
“Be careful if you feel like the insurance agent is pushing you to make a decision,” says Andrew Shea, senior vice president of marketing at eHealth. And if in doubt, don’t hesitate to get a second opinion, Shea counsels.
You can also talk to a Medicare counselor through one of the State Health Insurance Assistance Programs, which are present in every state. Find your state’s SHIP at www.shiptacenter.org.
Medicare & You, a comprehensive handbook, is worth reading. Download it at the official Medicare website, www.medicare.gov.
The website offers a deep dive into all aspects of Medicare. If you type in your ZIP code, you can see and compare all the Medicare Advantage plans, supplemental insurance plans, known as Medigap, and stand-alone drug (Part D) plans.
The site also shows you quality ratings of the plans, on a five-star scale. And it will display your drug costs under each plan if you type in all your prescriptions. Explore the website before you talk to an insurance agent.
California Coverage and Health Initiatives can refer you to licensed insurance agents who will provide local advice and enrollment assistance. Call 833-720-2244. Its members specialize in helping people who are eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid, the health insurance program for low-income people.
These so-called dual eligibles — nearly 1.5 million in California and about 12 million nationwide — get additional benefits, and in some cases they don’t have to pay Medicare’s monthly medical (Part B) premium, which will be $148.50 in 2021 for most beneficiaries, but higher for people above certain income thresholds.
If you choose traditional Medicare, consider a Medigap supplement if you can afford it. Without it, you’re liable for 20% of your physician and outpatient costs and a hefty hospital deductible, with no cap on how much you pay out of your own pocket. If you need prescription drugs, you’ll probably want a Part D plan.
Medicare Advantage, by contrast, is a one-stop shop. It usually includes a drug benefit in addition to other Medicare benefits, with cost sharing for services and prescriptions that varies from plan to plan. Medicare Advantage plans typically have low to no premiums — aside from the Part B premium that most people pay in either version of Medicare. And they increasingly offer additional benefits, including vision, dental, transportation, meal deliveries and even coverage while traveling abroad.
Beware of the risks, however.
Yes, the traditional Medicare route is generally more expensive upfront if you want to be fully covered. That’s because you pay a monthly premium for a Medigap policy, which can cost $200 or more. Add to that the premium for Part D, estimated to average $41 a month in 2021, according to KFF. (KHN is an editorially independent program of KFF.)
However, Medigap policies will often protect you against large medical bills if you need lots of care.
In some cases, Medicare Advantage could end up being more expensive if you get seriously ill or injured, because copays can quickly add up. They are typically capped each year, but can still cost you thousands of dollars. Advantage plans also typically have more limited provider networks, and the extra benefits they offer can be subject to restrictions.
Over one-third of Medicare beneficiaries nationally are enrolled in Advantage plans. In California, about 40% are.
The main appeal of traditional Medicare is that it doesn’t have the rules and restrictions of managed care.
Dr. Mark Kalish, a retired psychiatrist in San Diego, says he opted for traditional fee-for-service with Medigap and Part D because he didn’t want a “mother may I” plan.
“I’m 69 years old, so heart attacks happen; cancer happens. I want to be able to pick my own doctor and go where I want,” Kalish says. “I’ve done well, so the money isn’t an issue for me.”
Be aware that if you don’t join a Medigap plan during a six-month open enrollment period that begins when you enroll in Medicare Part B, you could be denied coverage for a preexisting condition if you try to buy one later.
There are a few exceptions to that in federal law, and four states — New York, Massachusetts, Maine, Connecticut — require continuous or yearly access to Medigap coverage regardless of health status.
Make sure you understand the rules and exceptions that apply to you.
Indeed, that is an excellent rule of thumb for all Medicare beneficiaries. Read up and talk to insurance agents and Medicare counselors. Talk to friends, family members, your doctor, your health plan — and other health plans.
When it comes to Medicare, says Erin Trish, associate director of the University of Southern California’s Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics, “it takes a village.”
Back in March, just as anxiety over COVID-19 began spreading across the U.S., Erinn Baldeschwiler of La Conner, Washington, found herself facing her own private dread.
Just 48 and the mother of two teenagers, Baldeschwiler was diagnosed with stage 4 metastatic breast cancer after discovering a small lump on her chest, no bigger than a pea. Within weeks, it was the size of a golf ball, angry and red. Doctors gave her two years to live.
"It's heartbreaking," she said. "Frankly, I was terrified."
But instead of retreating into her illness, Baldeschwiler is pouring energy into a new effort to help dying patients gain legal access to psilocybin — the mind-altering compound found in so-called magic mushrooms — to ease their psychic pain.
"I have personally struggled with depression, anxiety, anger," Baldeschwiler said. "This therapy is designed to really dive in and release these negative fears and shadows."
Dr. Sunil Aggarwal, a Seattle palliative care physician, and Kathryn Tucker, a lawyer who advocates on behalf of terminally ill patients and chairs a psychedelic practice group at Emerge Law Group, are championing a novel strategy that would make psilocybin available using state and federal "right-to-try" laws that allow terminally ill patients access to investigational drugs.
They contend that psilocybin — whether found in psychedelic mushrooms or synthetic copies — meets the criteria for use laid out by more than 40 states and the 2017 Right to Try Act approved by the Trump administration.
"Can you look at the statute and see by its terms that it applies to psilocybin?" Tucker said. "I think the answer is yes."
Still, the pair admit they're pushing a legal theory still untested in the courts. "This is untrodden ground," Aggarwal said.
This month, Aggarwal, who works at the Advanced Integrative Medical Science Institute, known as AIMS, took the first step toward federal authorization of the substance in Washington state and perhaps across the nation. He submitted an application to manufacture psilocybin to the state's Pharmacy Quality Assurance Commission, which would allow him to grow psilocybin mushrooms from spores at his clinic and administer them for therapeutic use.
Commission members haven't yet reviewed the application, but Gordon MacCracken, an agency spokesperson, said there "would be a path" for possible license and use — if the application meets the requirements of state regulators and the federal Drug Enforcement Administration.
Currently, psilocybin use is illegal under federal law, classified as a Schedule 1 drug under the U.S. Controlled Substances Act, which applies to chemicals and substances with no accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse, such as heroin and LSD.
Recently, however, several U.S. cities and states have voted to decriminalize possession of small amounts of psilocybin. This month, Oregon became the first state to legalize psilocybin for regulated use in treating intractable mental health problems. The first patients will have access beginning in January 2023.
It's part of a wider movement to rekindle acceptance of psilocybin, which was among psychedelic drugs vilified — and ultimately banned — after the legendary counterculture excesses of the 1960s and 1970s.
"I think a lot of those demons, those fears, have been metabolized in the 50 years since then," Aggarwal said. "Not completely, but we've moved it along so that it's safe to try again."
Psilocybin therapy appears to work by chemically altering brain function in a way that temporarily affects a person's ego, or sense of self. In essence, it plays on the out-of-body experiences made famous in portrayals of America's psychedelic '60s.
By getting out of their heads — and separating from all the fear and emotion surrounding death — people experience "being" as something distinct from their physical forms. That leads to a fundamental shift in perspective, said Dr. Ira Byock, a palliative care specialist and medical officer for the Institute for Human Caring at Providence St. Joseph Health.
"What psychedelics do is foster a frame shift from feeling helpless and hopeless and that life is not worth living to seeing that we are connected to other people and we are connected to a universe that has inherent connection," he said.
"Along with that shift in perspective, there is very commonly a notable dissolution of the fear of dying, of nonexistence and of loss, and that's just remarkable."
The key is to offer the drugs under controlled conditions, in a quiet room supervised by a trained guide, Byock said. "It turned out they are exceedingly safe when used in a carefully screened, carefully guided situation with trained therapists," he said. "Almost the opposite is true when used in an unprepared, unscreened population."
Baldeschwiler is one of several AIMS cancer patients eager to undergo psilocybin therapy. Another is Michal Bloom, 64, of Seattle, who was diagnosed in 2017 with stage 3 ovarian cancer. The anxiety of living with the terminal disease is overwhelming, she said.
"It's as if someone came up to you, put a gun to the back of your head, whispered, 'I have a gun to your head and I'll have a gun to your head for the rest of your life. I may pull the trigger, I may not,'" she said. "How do you live like that?"
Research shows that a single six-hour session of psilocybin therapy may be enough to quell that fear, Aggarwal said. "I'm really interested in a right-to-try approach because it's really what we need for patients right now," he said.
Under the state and federal laws, to be eligible for "right-to-try" status, a treatment must have completed a phase 1 clinical trial approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration, be part of active clinical trials and in ongoing development or production.
So far, psilocybin ticks all those boxes, Tucker said.
The FDA has granted "breakthrough therapy" status to psilocybin for use in U.S. clinical trials conducted by Compass Pathways, a psychedelic research group in Britain, and by the Usona Institute, a nonprofit medical research group in Wisconsin. More than three dozen trials are recruiting participants or completed, federal records show.
But access to the drug remains a hurdle. Though psychedelic mushrooms grow wild in the Pacific Northwest and underground sources of the drug are available, finding a legal supply is nearly impossible.
Tucker and Aggarwal asked Usona last summer for a supply of the synthetic psilocybin its researchers produce for clinical trials, but so far have received nothing. Penny Patterson, a Usona spokesperson, said there's been no "definitive resolution" and that conversations are continuing.
The firm's reluctance may reflect a larger unease with employing right-to-try laws to speed use of psilocybin, said Dr. Anthony Back, a palliative care physician at the University of Washington.
Back supports the use of psilocybin for cancer patients and has even tried the drug to better understand the experience. But he said using psilocybin outside of formal clinical trials might endanger Usona's ability to get traditional FDA approval. Adverse events may occur that will have to be reported to the FDA, an agency already watching the research closely.
"I can see why they're hesitant, to be honest," Back said. "I think right-to-try is an uphill battle."
Still, Tucker and other advocates say it's a battle worth fighting. End of Life Washington, a group focused on helping terminally ill patients use the state's Death With Dignity Act, recently published a policy that supports psilocybin therapy as a form of palliative care. Other treatments for anxiety and depression, such as medication and counseling, may simply not be practical or effective at that point, said Judith Gordon, a psychologist and member of the group's board of directors.
"When people are dying, they don't have the time or the energy to do a lot of psychotherapy," she said.
Baldeschwiler agrees. With perhaps less than two years to live, she wants access to any tool that can ease her pain. Immunotherapy has helped with the physical symptoms, dramatically shrinking the size of the tumor on her chest. Harder to treat has been the gnawing anxiety that she won't see her 16-year-old daughter, Shea McGinnis, and 13-year-old son, Gibson McGinnis, become adults.
"They are beautiful children, good spirits," she said. "To know I might not be around for them sucks. It's really hard."
Adding to that stress is that nurses are caught betwixt caring for the bedside needs of their patients and implementing policies set by others, such as physician-ordered treatment plans and strict hospital rules to ward off the coronavirus.
This article was published on Tuesday, November 24, 2020 in Kaiser Health News.
For Christina Nester, the pandemic lull in Massachusetts lasted about three months through summer into early fall. In late June, St. Vincent Hospital had resumed elective surgeries, and the unit the 48-year-old nurse works on switched back from taking care of only COVID-19 patients to its pre-pandemic roster of patients recovering from gallbladder operations, mastectomies and other surgeries.
That is, until October, when patients with coronavirus infections began to reappear on the unit and, with them, the fear of many more to come. "It's paralyzing, I'm not going to lie," said Nester, who's worked at the Worcester hospital for nearly two decades. "My little clan of nurses that I work with, we panicked when it started to uptick here."
Adding to that stress is that nurses are caught betwixt caring for the bedside needs of their patients and implementing policies set by others, such as physician-ordered treatment plans and strict hospital rules to ward off the coronavirus. The push-pull of those forces, amid a fight against a deadly disease, is straining this vital backbone of health providers nationwide, and that could accumulate to unstainable levels if the virus's surge is not contained this winter, advocates and researchers warn.
Nurses spend the most sustained time with a patient of any clinician, and these days patients are often incredibly fearful and isolated, said Cynda Rushton, a registered nurse and bioethicist at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore.
"They have become, in some ways, a kind of emotional surrogate for family members who can't be there, to support and advise and offer a human touch," Rushton said. "They have witnessed incredible amounts of suffering and death. That, I think, also weighs really heavily on nurses."
A study published this fall in the journal General Hospital Psychiatry found that 64% of clinicians working as nurses, nurse practitioners or physician assistants at a New York City hospital screened positively for acute distress, 53% for depressive symptoms and 40% for anxiety — all higher rates than found among physicians screened.
Researchers are concerned that nurses working in a rapidly changing crisis like the pandemic — with problems ranging from staff shortages that curtail their time with patients to enforcing visitation policies that upset families — can develop a psychological response called "moral injury." That injury occurs, they say, when nurses feel stymied by their inability to provide the level of care they believe patients require.
Dr. Wendy Dean, co-founder of Moral Injury of Healthcare, a nonprofit organization based in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, said, "Probably the biggest driver of burnout is unrecognized unattended moral injury."
In parts of the country over the summer, nurses got some mental health respite when cases declined, Dean said.
"Not enough to really process it all," she said. "I think that's a process that will take several years. And it's probably going to be extended because the pandemic itself is extended."
Before the pandemic hit her Massachusetts hospital "like a forest fire" in March, Nester had rarely seen a patient die, other than someone in the final days of a disease like cancer.
Suddenly she was involved with frequent transfers of patients to the intensive care unit when they couldn't breathe. She recounts stories, imprinted on her memory: The woman in her 80s who didn't even seem ill on the day she was hospitalized, who Nester helped transport to the morgue less than a week later. The husband and wife who were sick in the intensive care unit, while the adult daughter fought the virus on Nester's unit.
"Then both parents died, and the daughter died," Nester said. "There's not really words for it."
During these gut-wrenching shifts, nurses can sometimes become separated from their emotional support system — one another, said Rushton, who has written a book about preventing moral injury among healthcare providers. To better handle the influx, some nurses who typically work in noncritical care areas have been moved to care for seriously ill patients. That forces them to not only adjust to a new type of nursing, but also disrupts an often-well-honed working rhythm and camaraderie with their regular nursing co-workers, she said.
At St. Vincent Hospital, the nurses on Nester's unit were told one March day that the primarily postsurgical unit was being converted to a COVID unit. Nester tried to squelch fears for her own safety while comforting her COVID-19 patients, who were often elderly, terrified and sometimes hard of hearing, making it difficult to communicate through layers of masks.
"You're trying to yell through all of these barriers and try to show them with your eyes that you're here and you're not going to leave them and will take care of them," she said. "But yet you're panicking inside completely that you're going to get this disease and you're going to be the one in the bed or a family member that you love, take it home to them."
When asked if hospital leaders had seen signs of strain among the nursing staff or were concerned about their resilience headed into the winter months, a St. Vincent spokesperson wrote in a brief statement that during the pandemic "we have prioritized the safety and well-being of our staff, and we remain focused on that."
Nationally, the viral risk to clinicians has been well documented. From March 1 through May 31, 6% of adults hospitalized were healthcare workers, one-third of them in nursing-related occupations, according to data published last month by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
As cases mount in the winter months, moral injury researcher Dean said, "nurses are going to do the calculation and say, 'This risk isn't worth it.'"
Juliano Innocenti, a traveling nurse working in the San Francisco area, decided to take off for a few months and will focus on wrapping up his nurse practitioner degree instead. Since April, he's been seeing a therapist "to navigate my powerlessness in all of this."
Innocenti, 41, has not been on the front lines in a hospital battling COVID-19, but he still feels the stress because he has been treating the public at an outpatient dialysis clinic and a psychiatric hospital and seen administrative problems generated by the crisis. He pointed to issues such as inadequate personal protective equipment.
Innocenti said he was concerned about "the lack of planning and just blatant disregard for the basic safety of patients and staff." Profit motives too often drive decisions, he suggested. "That's what I'm taking a break from."
Building Resiliency
As cases surge again, hospital leaders need to think bigger than employee assistance programs to backstop their already depleted ranks of nurses, Dean said. Along with plenty of protective equipment, that includes helping them with everything from groceries to transportation, she said. Overstaff a bit, she suggested, so nurses can take a day off when they hit an emotional cliff.
The American Nurses Association, the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses (AACN) and several other nursing groups have compiled online resources with links to mental health programs as well as tips for getting through each pandemic workday.
Kiersten Henry, an AACN board member and nurse practitioner in the intensive care unit at MedStar Montgomery Medical Center in Olney, Maryland, said that the nurses and other clinicians there have started to gather for a quick huddle at the end of difficult shifts. Along with talking about what happened, they share several good things that also occurred that day.
"It doesn't mean that you're not taking it home with you," Henry said, "but you're actually verbally processing it to your peers."
When cases reached their highest point of the spring in Massachusetts, Nester said there were some days she didn't want to return.
"But you know that your friends are there," she said. "And the only ones that really truly understand what's going on are your co-workers. How can you leave them?"
Many rural communities across the U.S. have resisted masks and calls for social distancing during the coronavirus pandemic, but now rural counties are experiencing record-high infection and death rates.
This article was published on Tuesday, November 24, 2020 in Kaiser Health News.
Registered nurse Pascaline Muhindura has spent the past eight months treating COVID patients at Research Medical Center in Kansas City, Missouri.
But when she returns home to her small town of Spring Hill, Kansas, she's often stunned by what she sees, like on a recent stop for carryout food.
"No one in the entire restaurant was wearing a mask," Muhindura said. "And there's no social distancing. I had to get out, because I almost had a panic attack. I was like, 'What is going on with people? Why are we still doing this?'"
Many rural communities across the U.S. have resisted masks and calls for social distancing during the coronavirus pandemic, but now rural counties are experiencing record-high infection and death rates.
Critically ill rural patients are often sent to city hospitals for high-level treatment and, as their numbers grow, some urban hospitals are buckling under the added strain.
Kansas City has a mask mandate, but in many smaller communities nearby, masks aren't required — or masking orders are routinely ignored. In the past few months, rural counties in both Kansas and Missouri have seen some of the highest rates of COVID-19 in the country.
At the same time, according to an analysis by KHN, about 3 in 4 counties in Kansas and Missouridon't have a single intensive care unit bed, so when people from these places get critically ill, they're sent to city hospitals.
A recent patient count at St. Luke's Health System in Kansas City showed a quarter of COVID patients had come from outside the metro area.
Two-thirds of the patients coming from rural areas need intensive care and stay in the hospital for an average of two weeks, said Dr. Marc Larsen, who leads COVID-19 treatment at St. Luke's.
"Not only are we seeing an uptick in those patients in our hospital from the rural community, they are sicker when we get them because [doctors in smaller communities] are able to handle the less sick patients," said Larsen. "We get the sickest of the sick."
Dr. Rex Archer, head of Kansas City's health department, warns that capacity at the city's 33 hospitals is being put at risk by the influx of rural patients.
"We've had this huge swing that's occurred because they're not wearing masks, and yes, that's putting pressure on our hospitals, which is unfair to our residents that might be denied an ICU bed," Archer said.
A study newly released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention showed that Kansas counties that mandated masks in early July saw decreases in new COVID cases, while counties without mask mandates recorded increases.
Hospital leaders have continued to plead with Missouri Republican Gov. Mike Parson, and with Kansas' conservative legislature, to implement stringent, statewide mask requirements but without success.
Parson won the Missouri gubernatorial election on Nov. 3 by nearly 17 percentage points. Two days later at a COVID briefing, he accused critics of "making the mask a political issue." He said county leaders should decide whether to close businesses or mandate masks.
"We're going to encourage them to take some sort of action," Parson saidThursday. "The holidays are coming and I, as governor of the state of Missouri, am not going to mandate who goes in your front door."
In an email, Dave Dillon, a spokesperson for the Missouri Hospital Association, agreed that rural patients might be contributing to hospital crowding in cities but argued that the strain on hospitals is a statewide problem.
The reasons for the rural COVID crisis involve far more than the refusal to mandate or wear masks, according to healthcare experts.
Both Kansas and Missouri have seen rural hospitals close year after year, and public health spending in both states, as in many largely rural states, is far below national averages.
Rural populations also tend to be older and to suffer from higher rates of chronic health conditions, including heart disease, obesity and diabetes. Those conditions can make them more susceptible to severe illness when they contract COVID-19.
Rural areas have been grappling with health problems for a long time, but the coronavirus has been a sort of tipping point, and those rural health issues are now spilling over into cities, explained Shannon Monnat, a rural health researcher at Syracuse University.
"It's not just the rural healthcare infrastructure that becomes overwhelmed when there aren't enough hospital beds, it's also the surrounding neighborhoods, the suburbs, the urban hospital infrastructure starts to become overwhelmed as well," Monnat said.
Unlike many parts of the U.S., where COVID trend lines have risen and fallen over the course of the year, Kansas, Missouri and several other Midwestern states never significantly bent their statewide curve.
Individual cities, such as Kansas City and St. Louis, have managed to slow cases, but the continual emergence of rural hot spots across Missouri has driven a slow and steady increase in overall new case numbers — and put an unrelenting strain on the states' hospital systems.
The months of slow but continuous growth in cases created a high baseline of cases as autumn began, which then set the stage for the sudden escalation of numbers in the recent surge.
"It's sort of the nature of epidemics that things often look like they're relatively under control, and then very quickly ramp up to seem that they are out of hand," said Justin Lessler, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
Now, a recent local case spike in the Kansas City metro area is adding to the statewide surge in Missouri, with an average of 190 COVID patients per day being admitted to the metro region's hospitals. The number of people hospitalized throughout Missouri increased by more than 50% in the past two weeks.
Some Kansas City hospitals have had to divert patients for periods of time, and some are now delaying elective procedures, according to the University of Kansas Health system's chief medical officer, Dr. Steven Stites.
But bed space isn't the only hospital resource that's running out. Half of the hospitals in the Kansas City area are now reporting "critical" staffing shortages. Pascaline Muhindura, the nurse who works in Kansas City, said that hospital workers are struggling with anxiety and depression.
"The hospitals are not fine, because people taking care of patients are on the brink," Muhindura said. "We are tired."
This story is from a reporting partnership that includes KCUR, NPRand KHN.